Pre-biologic assessment of adherence in severe asthma and association with biologic continuation: a UK Severe Asthma Registry Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Biologic therapies are approved for uncontrolled severe asthma despite good adherence to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and additional controllers. We examined the adherence assessments used across UK Severe Asthma Centres (SACs) and their relationship with biologic continuation and response. METHODS: UK SACs completed a quantitative survey on adherence assessment practices in 2022. We included all adult patients with severe asthma patients on ICS starting biologic therapy from the UK Severe Asthma Registry, which collects pre-biologic adherence data, including medication possession ratio (MPR), fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) suppression testing and serum prednisolone levels. Biologic continuation and response were defined as continuation on any biologic and the same biologic after 1 year, respectively. Associations were determined using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: At 21 SACs, MPR for ICS was assessed at 19 (90%) centres, prednisolone and/or cortisol levels in patients on daily oral corticosteroids at 15 (71%), and FeNO suppression testing at 9 (43%). Of 3307 biologic-initiated patients, 1943 (59%) had MPR for ICS recorded, of which 1802 (93%) demonstrated good adherence (≥75% MPR). Only 110 (9%) and 272 (16%) had FeNO suppression and serum prednisolone results, respectively. Good ICS adherence was associated with 2.65-fold higher odds (95% CI 1.02 to 6.91) of biologic continuation, but not with biologic response (OR 1.37, 95% CI 0.50 to 3.76). CONCLUSION: Good pre-biologic ICS adherence, measured using MPR, is associated with biologic continuation at 1 year. Further research is needed to determine whether baseline adherence predicts biologic response based on clinical and biologic criteria.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".